Biden draws support — and GOP worry — in shift on US missiles in Ukraine war

Lawmakers in both parties are generally offering support for President Biden's decision to authorize a major shift in U.S. policy to allow Ukraine to use long-range U.S. missiles to attack sites in Russia.

The escalatory move came less than two weeks after President-elect Trump defeated Vice President Harris in the presidential election. The incoming president's most vocal supporters on Capitol Hill have been much less enthusiastic to support Ukraine, and Donald Trump Jr. suggested Biden's decision could trigger a third world war.

But key figures in both parties said they thought the stronger U.S. policy was to back Ukraine's ability to attack the Kremlin forces in Russia, particularly now that North Korean troops have also arrived on the scene.

“It’s high time we do this and help Ukraine push [Russia] back and be victorious,” Rep. Salud Carbajal (D-Calif.) said.

Republicans say the move came too late.

“Better late than never, but it was late,” said Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. “I’ve been urging the administration to untie their hands for two years, and every weapons system they drag their feet and then they finally approve it. ... Let them use everything we’re giving them. Stop putting restrictions on them.”

The policy change spurred Moscow to lower the threshold for nuclear weapons use, renewing fears of a serious escalation in the war.

Russian President Vladimir Putin updated his nuclear doctrine Tuesday to say an attack on Russia with conventional weapons from a nonnuclear state, but with the support of a nuclear-armed state, would be considered a joint attack.

That could trigger a nuclear response, the Kremlin said, as Putin appears to be issuing a major threat to the U.S. and Western allies.

Rep. Gregory Meeks (N.Y.), senior Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said he was not worried about the bolder strategy, faulting Russia for ratcheting up the war by deploying North Korean troops.

"The escalation's on the other side,” Meeks said. "So now to have the ability to go and take those weapons out, so they can stop the shooting at Ukraine — indiscriminately — is the right thing to do.“

But Rep. Brian Mast (R-Fla.) sounded a more cautious note.

“The administration should not take that as saber-rattling,” he said. “They should take the very serious elevation of a nuclear threat posture as a very serious threat.”

Biden on Sunday authorized Ukraine to use the Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) inside Russia, though the White House has yet to publicly confirm the approval.

ATACMS, which can strike at targets up to 190 miles away, will give Ukraine a much-needed edge, allowing Kyiv to hit critical ammunition depots and approaching troops. Ukraine has asked for the long-range missiles to hit inside of Russia since at least 2022 and increased lobbying for the capability in the past few months.

On Tuesday, Ukraine used the ATACMS for the first time in Russia, hitting an ammunition depot in Bryansk, according to the Russian Ministry of Defense.

Such missile strikes may also prove critical in Kursk, where Russian and North Korean troops are working to dislodge Ukrainian forces that took swaths of the territory in Russia in a surprise August attack.

Trump has said he would end the war by the time he takes office Jan. 20. The ATACMS policy will give Ukraine more leverage in the expected negotiations, lawmakers say.

That’s because Russia has pounded Ukrainian troops on the battlefield for the past year-and-a-half and is slowly gaining more territory in eastern Ukraine, although Russian forces have also suffered heavy losses.

“In a month-and-a-half, you’re going to have a new president, and Russia will probably sue for peace,” Rep. Rich McCormick (R-Ga.) said. “So let them defend themselves, punch Russia back in the face.

“Putin has a light at the end of the tunnel where he can save face. He's not going to start a nuclear war with all of Europe and the United States when he knows in a month-and-a-half now, you're going to have a new leadership.”

But many of Trump’s biggest supporters on Capitol Hill have long called for an end to U.S. assistance to Ukraine and the war, and they are upset about the shift on ATACMS.

Rep. Mike Waltz (R-Fla.), Trump’s pick for national security adviser, said Monday on Fox News that it was “another step up the escalation ladder.”

Rep. Cory Mills (R-Fla.), who does not support more security funding for Ukraine, said the ATACMS move was a “continual escalation in the wrong direction.”

“Biden is going to do what Biden's done the last four years, which is destroy the country, destroy our position on the world stage, try and weaken us in every way when it comes to negotiations, to make it more difficult for President Trump to go ahead and focus on the 'America First' agenda,” he said.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said he supported lifting the ATACMS restrictions because it could “lead to a diplomatic breakthrough,” but he also accused Biden of being “shallow” and trying to stymie Trump.

“He's trying to put Trump in a box,” Graham said, adding it was “odd that he decided to do this right after the election. ... I just think that this was something he should have done to help Ukraine, and he's playing politics with it. And I think that's a crappy thing to do.”

Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) said she was worried “about this last-minute shift in policy before Trump comes in to defuse the situation.”

“I don't understand the abrupt change in foreign policy on this matter. It's concerning to me,” she said. “We all want Ukraine to win, but Trump's going to be the new leader of the free world.”

Critics fear Trump will give up territory in eastern Ukraine seized by Russia since the 2022 invasion. They have also pointed to his close relations with Putin, with Trump reportedly having called the Russian leader seven times since leaving office.

But Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) argued Trump would not “hamstring Ukraine” in the negotiations.

“He's going to look at President Putin, who he's met with,” he said, “and who he has both respect and a willingness to be tough with and give him a choice: Come to the table now, or we have to back Ukraine in a way that keeps you from getting further advantage. That's the implied support.”

Mike Lillis contributed.